CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #53 *ARREST*

Status
Not open for further replies.
Complete motion at link.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/04th_Judicial_District/Teller/caseofinterest/2018CR330/002/2019-05-22 22-04-53 Motion for Sanctions.pdf

5. Counsel refers the Court, in a way analogous to an exhibit, to:


6. The above linked website is an archived version of the “Live-Stream” that appeared on KOAA’s website, an identical version, or portions thereof, of which also appeared on other local and national websites at the time of the arraignment and continue to appear online as of the time of the writing of this Motion. All time stamps referred to below are from that website.

7. There was only one camera allowed in the courtroom for the April 5 Arraignment, per court order, so all the feeds, regardless of network, affiliate, or website, were identical.

8. The camera on April 5 was set up immediately behind defense counsel table, as opposed to previous court dates when Expanded Media Coverage was allowed, when the camera was set up next to the jury box, across the courtroom from the defense table.

9. As has been this Court’s practice, before the Court called the case of Mr. Frazee, counsel met with the judge in chambers. During this period, Mr. Frazee was brought into court by Teller County Sheriff Deputies. See 5:58 into the YouTube video. The live stream broadcast for nearly six minutes before Mr. Frazee was in the courtroom. Mr. Frazee appears on camera wearing a striped jail jumpsuit, pink handcuffs, and a bullet-proof vest. Mr. Frazee sits at defense counsel table alone because counsel was in chambers with the judge and opposing counsel. The camera zooms up close on Mr. Frazee’s face before focusing on the pink handcuffs he has been placed in. See 7:05 into the YouTube video.

10. At 8:35 into the YouTube video, counsel enters the courtroom from chambers. Counsel was carrying a piece of paper – work product – with him. It was placed on defense table as counsel sat down and began speaking with Mr. Frazee. The camera immediately zoomed in on the paper. See 8:50 into the YouTube video. Fortunately, the paper was placed with a blank side of the page up.

11. The camera then, in direct violation of the Court’s orders, zoomed in on counsel and Mr. Frazee having a conversation at defense table. See 8:55 into the YouTube video.

12. After opposing counsel entered the room, the camera then zoomed in again; this time, on the papers on the lectern in the middle of the courtroom. See 9:15 into the YouTube video.

13. After moving about the courtroom, the camera then zoomed in on opposing counsel having a private conversation. See 9:59 into the YouTube video.

14. The camera then focused on the defense table, displaying defense counsel’s computer screen, which, again, was work product. See 10:30 into the Youtube video. As counsel and Mr. Frazee spoke privately, the camera zoomed in on counsel and Mr. Frazee from the side. See 10:48 into the YouTube video.

15. The camera, after moving about the bench, then zoomed in on an open book on the Courts’ desk, showing highlights on what appears to be a statute book. See 11:30 into the YouTube video.

16. After the Arraignment, the camera again zoomed in on counsel and Mr. Frazee having a conversation. See 16:35 into the YouTube video.

17. All of the above mentioned instances were in violation of the Court’s orders concerning expanded media coverage, substantially placed into jeopardy Mr. Frazee’s rights to a fair trial, or unduly subtracted from the solemnity of the court and proceedings.

18. Zoom photography of counsel and Mr. Frazee’s conversations was specifically prohibited by the Court’s Order.

19. Zooming in on documents on counsel table, on documents on the lectern, on books on the judge’s bench, or on counsel’s computer all place Mr. Frazee’s right to a fair trial in jeopardy. All examples also detract from the proceedings and the solemnity of the court.

20. Additionally, none of those offenses would have taken place with traditional media coverage.

21. Importantly, none of these breaches of the court’s orders or etiquette at all informed the public of anything of import. Such that there is a balancing test in play, there was nothing of value on the side of expanding media coverage as compared to traditional media coverage that was added, only the possibility of prejudice and actual prejudice.

Well for our sake, I hope they lose with their attempts to prohibit Tweeting from the court room.

I imagine they will.

We had no expectation of cameras during the trial, but prohibiting live coverage from reporters in the gallery, is a bridge too far.

They succeeded in getting the judge to block EMC today, but if that’s their biggest victory, I can live with that.

If PF didn’t want reporters covering his trial, he shouldn’t have beaten Kelsey to death.
 

Attachments

  • 70D2D3F8-C9F0-44A1-BED9-3E90AFB2F492.jpeg
    70D2D3F8-C9F0-44A1-BED9-3E90AFB2F492.jpeg
    24.8 KB · Views: 12
They succeeded in getting the judge to block EMC today, but if that’s their biggest victory, I can live with that.

70D2D3F8-C9F0-44A1-BED9-3E90AFB2F492.jpeg

If PF didn’t want reporters covering his trial, he shouldn’t have beaten Kelsey to death.

SABBM:

No kidding!

For what it's worth, I have no doubt that this will in fact be the defense team's first, biggest, last and only "victory" in that courtroom.

It's all an uphill battle for them from here on out...and the bad news for them is that ironically, while they're waging their uphill battle, their entire case will be going downhill at lightning fast speed at the exact same time.

Speaking of irony, the utter ridiculousness of PF requesting an order of decorum (!) is beyond mind-boggling.

So PF, the creep who beat KB to death with a baseball bat, bludgeoning her so viciously that he knocked her teeth out, is now concerned that cameras can see what he's writing on his dumb doodle pad in court.

JMO.
 
BBM. Good to know. I look for them every time he appears with the pic they get outside on arrival but can never see any... That very well could just be me though... :)

Are they pink too? :)
Nope, I'd say they're silver/gray and that may be why you're having trouble seeing them. They sort of blend in with the ground. I'm viewing the video on a large screen too, so that helps. Not sure I'd see them in a photo either. I wish they were pink, lol! :D MOO
 
Nope, I'd say they're silver/gray and that may be why you're having trouble seeing them. They sort of blend in with the ground. I'm viewing the video on a large screen too, so that helps. Not sure I'd see them in a photo either. I wish they were pink, lol! :D MOO

Part of it is his gait when he enters the courthouse, it does not strike me as the usual shuffle I guess. They also get him inside so fast, I just never see them. They should use pink so others do not assume what I did, that they do not shackle those charged with murder when moving them amongst the public ;) Thanks for clearing that up :)
 
Yes, the fact that baby K is safe with the Berreth family is the only comfort I can take from this travesty. They will raise her in the same caring and loving home like they did her momma Kelsey and those twisted F's won't be getting anywhere near her IMO.

I sure hope not! And if MaF is claiming she’s ill and can’t testify, that won’t help her custody case.

I believe there was thought by the authorities in placing Baby K with Kelsey’s family. The longer she’s there, the better. She is so young.

Glad to see an example of CPS doing the right thing.

All IMO.
 
SABBM:

No kidding!

For what it's worth, I have no doubt that this will in fact be the defense team's first, biggest, last and only "victory" in that courtroom.

It's all an uphill battle for them from here on out...and the bad news for them is that ironically, while they're waging their uphill battle, their entire case will be going downhill at lightning fast speed at the exact same time.

Speaking of irony, the utter ridiculousness of PF requesting an order of decorum (!) is beyond mind-boggling.

So PF, the creep who beat KB to death with a baseball bat, bludgeoning her so viciously that he knocked her teeth out, is now concerned that cameras can see what he's writing on his dumb doodle pad in court.

JMO.
Hopefully he will have plenty of privacy down the road. Those pesky reporters will not be around for his one hour in the yard.
JMO
 
Part of it is his gait when he enters the courthouse, it does not strike me as the usual shuffle I guess. They also get him inside so fast, I just never see them. They should use pink so others do not assume what I did, that they do not shackle those charged with murder when moving them amongst the public ;) Thanks for clearing that up :)

I looked at PF’s ankles as he was loading into his ride. They are not shackled. That is unusual for prisoner transport. Wonder what he will wear for trial? Hopefully his P-F ball cap.
 
I don’ believe DA May will seek Death Penalty. It will never be carried out in Colorado and there may be a higher standard of proof. Colorado Legislators will be trying to remove it during their next session anyway. No reason to risk anything as long as PF remains locked up tight.

I wonder if he will get beans and hotdogs instead of hotdogs and beans for Memorial Day?
 
I don’ believe DA May will seek Death Penalty. It will never be carried out in Colorado and there may be a higher standard of proof. Colorado Legislators will be trying to remove it during their next session anyway. No reason to risk anything as long as PF remains locked up tight.

I wonder if he will get beans and hotdogs instead of hotdogs and beans for Memorial Day?
Couldn't hurt to try :) JMO

BTW, wieners and beans is my "comfort food!"
 
I've seen a hearing or trial - can't remember which one - where a camera was aimed at the courthouse emblem on the wall. It was essentially a live audio stream. There is no reason that can't be considered. Live tweeting a three-week or more trial will be a huge burden to both tweet and follow. He's not entitled to privacy in this way and it really bothers me that the judge can't be more creative or flexible.

Colorado Statute provides that in criminal court, live audio streaming (i.e., expanded media coverage or EMC) may be considered for advisements and arraignments only. [Pursuant to Chapter 38, Rule 3 of the Colorado Supreme Court Rules].

The Court also makes the decision on allowing EMC for advisements and arraignments on a case by case basis. PF arraignment was a good example -- Court granted EMC for original scheduled "arraignment" on April 5, and denied the same for the continuance arraignment May 24 after defense opposed motion for EMC, and successfully argued there was a reasonable likelihood that expanded media coverage would interfere with the rights of the parties to a fair trial.

Unless the Court bans all electronic devices in the courtroom during the trial, essentially - live tweeting during the 3 week trial is the only option here. And no doubt Colorado Media Alliance will vigorously fight for this option. MOO
 
SusiQ said:
A bag over his head would be a marked improvement! JMO :D:p

animated-smileys-embarrassed-43.gif
 
Snip by me for focus..
- I hope KB left a will. I can't see why her parents would be in a hurry to execute any will she might have left, but if (please, no!) she left a will leaving anything to PF or Baby K directly, I assume PF and SF would want to get at it.

IF KB did will something to PF, I seriously hope that portion of the will could be invalidated based on him being her accused murderer? And I certainly would think it would be thrown out if he is ultimately convicted.

But I don’t know the legal answer...just speculating.
 
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/death_penalty_publication_2202017.pdf

Linking current Colorado law re: the death penalty.

DA May spent some time during the pc yesterday discussing the need for a jury to find at least 1 of Colorado's identified "Aggravating Factors" in order to impose the death penalty.
Page 13 of the linked doc lists the "Aggravated Factors" that make a Felony 1 case eligible for the DP.

It would take a lot of work and creative argument for DA May to make the case for the death penalty based on my reading of this list.

I see two potential qualifying factors, but the case for both is tenuous at best:
  • the offense was committed for pecuniary gain
  • the defendant committed the offense in an especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner
I've always believed that PF's primary motive for killing KB was a financial one.
PF didn't want to pay KB child support. Didn't want to cover any of KB's other expenses r/t the raising of Baby K, either. I think in PF's mind, if he had full "custody," i.e., if he handed Baby K off to Ma F to raise at the ranch, he wouldn't have to pay KB anything at all.
That's why he wanted custody. Not because he's some loving, devoted father. He's not.

A loving, devoted dad doesn't beat their baby's mommy to death with a baseball bat.

If KK had a will leaving anything to PF, that would bolster the argument for the murder having been committed for pecuniary gain, but I don't believe KK did any such thing.
In fact, I'll be shocked if she did.

Regardless, an argument can be made that PF murdered KB for pecuniary gain.

The second factor is particularly difficult to establish since this is a no body case.
The jury would have to believe that PF killed the mother of his child by bludgeoning her with a baseball bat on the strength of the blood evidence in the townhome and KK's testimony.

I don't see any other aggravating factors that would even remotely apply here in KB's case.
Does anyone else see something I've missed, though?

I don't know what DA May's personal feelings about the death penalty are, but I'm hoping he takes a good, hard, long look at those aggravating factors.

If DA May can make the case in his own mind for at least one of those factors being present, then I would love to see him make that case in front of the jury at trial.

I see a pathway to the capital murder case. It's narrow, and tough to navigate.

But it exists.

JMO.
 
Last edited:
IF KB did will something to PF, I seriously hope that portion of the will could be invalidated based on him being her accused murderer? And I certainly would think it would be thrown out if he is ultimately convicted.

But I don’t know the legal answer...just speculating.
I was always under the notion that one could not benefit financially through the commission of a crime. That would certainly pertain to that no good, despicable excuse of a man, PF. JMO as I have no legal expertise :)
 
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/death_penalty_publication_2202017.pdf

Linking current Colorado law re: the death penalty.

DA May spent some time during the pc yesterday discussing the need for a jury to find at least 1 of Colorado's identified "Aggravating Factors" in order to impose the death penalty.
Page 13 of the linked doc lists the "Aggravated Factors" that make a Felony 1 case eligible for the DP.

It would take a lot of work and creative argument for DA May to make the case for the death penalty based on my reading of this list.

I see two potential qualifying factors, but the case for both is tenuous at best:
  • the offense was committed for pecuniary gain
  • the defendant committed the offense in an especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner

JMO.
RSBBM
I know, I know, the DP is a long shot but he certainly deserves it. I hate thinking about this but what IF KB wasn't rendered unconscious after the first blow? I hate to think what transpired before the second or third, heaven forbid. Then being shoved into a tote, taken to the Franchette for TG dinner and two days later burned like trash? If that doesn't constitute "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved," I don't know what does. By Viehman's own words, KK describes the scene as "horrific." Come to think of it, the death penalty is too good for him. Sorry, JMO :(
 
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/death_penalty_publication_2202017.pdf

Linking current Colorado law re: the death penalty.

DA May spent some time during the pc yesterday discussing the need for a jury to find at least 1 of Colorado's identified "Aggravating Factors" in order to impose the death penalty.
Page 13 of the linked doc lists the "Aggravated Factors" that make a Felony 1 case eligible for the DP.

It would take a lot of work and creative argument for DA May to make the case for the death penalty based on my reading of this list.

I see two potential qualifying factors, but the case for both is tenuous at best:
  • the offense was committed for pecuniary gain
  • the defendant committed the offense in an especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner
I've always believed that PF's primary motive for killing KB was a financial one.
PF didn't want to pay KB child support. Didn't want to cover any of KB's other expenses r/t the raising of Baby K, either. I think in PF's mind, if he had full "custody," i.e., if he handed Baby K off to Ma F to raise at the ranch, he wouldn't have to pay KB anything at all.
That's why he wanted custody. Not because he's some loving, devoted father. He's not.

A loving, devoted dad doesn't beat their baby's mommy to death with a baseball bat.

If KK had a will leaving anything to PF, that would bolster the argument for the murder having been committed for pecuniary gain, but I don't believe KK did any such thing.
In fact, I'll be shocked if she did.

Regardless, an argument can be made that PF murdered KB for pecuniary gain.

The second factor is particularly difficult to establish since this is a no body case.
The jury would have to believe that PF killed the mother of his child by bludgeoning her with a baseball bat on the strength of the blood evidence in the townhome and KK's testimony.

I don't see any other aggravating factors that would even remotely apply here in KB's case.
Does anyone else see something I've missed, though?

I don't know what DA May's personal feelings about the death penalty are, but I'm hoping he takes a good, hard, long look at those aggravating factors.

If DA May can make the case in his own mind for at least one of those factors being present, then I would love to see him make that case in front of the jury at trial.

I see a pathway to the capital murder case. It's narrow, and tough to navigate.

But it exists.

JMO.

This one could apply:
“the defendant has been a party to an agreement to kill another person in furtherance of which a person has been intentionally killed;”
 
I have a question.....in the Felon Arias trial, I believe it was her....she was only allowed to use a stubby pencil to take notes. Is that true in PF trial and anyone else’s? Those in custody are only allowed stubby pencils?

Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
184
Guests online
2,367
Total visitors
2,551

Forum statistics

Threads
589,962
Messages
17,928,403
Members
228,020
Latest member
DazzelleShafer
Back
Top